The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > I can't read any more without saying this.
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 10-30-2008, 08:27 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beetlescott View Post
I agree with you in everything except one point. We don't have to have an altnernate timeline. There are plenty of things they can do and plenty of adventures they can have without messing with the canon or timeline of the Star Trek we know and love. I love the Halloween movies almost as much as Star Trek. I love the original, and part 2, but on part 4 they decided to go with a differnt timeline and set of actors, then in part 7 they decided to go back. Now the fans are left with a mess. Some fans love part 1,2, 7,8, 9 while others want 1,2, 4,5, & 6. I know that the horror movies are in no way as good as Star Trek, but to their fans, it is a mess with each movie they are hoping that someone will come along and try to combine the to seperate timelines. I said that to say this, do we want seperate stories? yes, bring them on, I have an open mind!!! But do we want and welcome a different timeline? Please NO!!! It would be a mess! I am for fresh and different, as long as they don't walk all over what we do know and love...STAR TREK. In all the years George Lucas dealt with the story of Star Wars, he didn't mess with the time line. So lets not do it here!!! What do you guys think?
I'm going to restate something in a way that hopefully everyone will understand isn't an attack or an insult:

I like Star Trek. I want to see Star Trek in theaters. That means I don't want it changed -- I'm going to the theater to see a new Star Trek story, and not a "new vision" of the Star Trek universe -- I like the original vision just fine and I want new stories set there! Refine it for the big screen? Yes, please! Polish it for HD? Bring it on! But don't turn it into a mishmash of Star Trek: Voyager and Star Trek: Enterprise -- if that's what you're about making, or seeing, more power to you -- but can't they make that its own thing and leave TOS to people who want to do stories set in that era? It can be done! If I had a Paramount-fueled budget, hell, I'd do it myself!
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-30-2008, 10:21 PM
MonsieurHood's Avatar
MonsieurHood MonsieurHood is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,352
Default

I don't mean to sound angry or reltaliatory in any way when I say this, but I will not be told by anyone else what to think, or what to feel in regards to something that I've loved to watch since I was a small child, namely Star Trek. I've played it in my back yard with friends, using sticks as phasers and a black Hot Wheels car for a communicator. I got communicator walkie talkies for Christmas presents, put together plastic model kits of starships and bought Technical manuals, Photonovels and James Blish script based short story treatments. I never missed a Star Trek movie theatrical release. I've been fascinated by the Star Trek universe since 1969 when I first viewed an episode on television. And it's what Star Trek was, that makes it what it is now for me. I cannot let go of the fact that Star Trek's history is now part of my own history. To see that all simply swept aside and totally disregarded in order to re mold it into something that may resemble what I remember in some manner, but that has lost it's soul, and become empty and meaningless. I'm not saying this film is going to be that, I'm saying that I don't want this film to be that. And if it turned out to be something empty, something soulless just to bring Trek up to date and make it cool and hip and loses all of it's substance, life and direction in the process, then it becomes a meaningless shadow play, a comic farce, a satire of itself. That is why I defend canon, that is why I make a big deal over Star Trek staying true to itself.
__________________
"One of the many, the proud, the friends of Zardoz".
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-31-2008, 01:43 AM
Fluxchiller Fluxchiller is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 39
Default

I think those people who feel they are being 'violated' by Abrams vision of Star Trek should 'Get A Life' as one famous person said.
Youve had your Original series, its been remastered and redone and youve got Movies from it, 10 of them, but it still lives in the shadow of Star Wars.
Obviously Paramount has decided that if its gonna do more Trek it needs to be as big as a Star Wars film and that means big budget,big design,big story.
I think from what I can gather from various interviews this Movie is for those who dont know Trek,who dont like Trek,are too young to remember Trek.
Star Trek is a BUSINESS for Paramount its called a FRANCHISE and it needs a kick up the proverbial ***.It has the potential to be the best science fiction franchise going and by just putting whats gone before on the big screen in this day and age is not gonna work.Star Trek WAS dead its was and is UNCOOL especially in this country (uk) .
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-31-2008, 06:00 AM
Chucky D's Avatar
Chucky D Chucky D is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in hiding from the Men in Black
Posts: 498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissionTrek08 View Post
As for Kirk's career aboard the Republic or Farragut: as we move ahead in this story and Kirk's career, wouldn't it be terribly easy to fit in short reference scenes or dialogue to include his service on the two ships... just like they did with TOS? If it worked before, it can work the same again.

There is only so much information that can be squeezed into a two-hour film, and filmmakers have gotten quite good at compressing events as needed to keep the story moving ahead -- I expect no less in TREK than from any other film.
Think of how JJ handled character development in LOST and MI:III. We the audience were presented flashbacks/flash-forwards that were usually no more than 5 minutes in length to present key moments in the character's life experience. I'm very interested to see how JJ handles "time" in this story overall because we already know characters from the TMP timeline will be travelling back to the pre-TOS era. In terms of Kirk on the Republic and Farragut, I am also hoping to get a glimpse into those experiences even if they only last a couple of scenes or even shots. I think that visual connection to what the fans already know of Kirk's career would be a real nice easter egg (is that the same as saying throwing the fans a bone?).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-31-2008, 09:19 AM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

I think what causes a lot of rancor among those that prefer a more classic Trek movie is all the people who keep telling them "Get over it" or "Tough, deal with it", "This ain't your Star Trek anymore," etc. That kind of talk can only make them even more resentful and defensive about the changes, I would gather.

People on both sides of the issue kinda need to chill, IMO...
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-31-2008, 11:46 AM
CAPTAIN MOUSE's Avatar
CAPTAIN MOUSE CAPTAIN MOUSE is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Placerville,CA
Posts: 2,564
Default

The one thing that is so wonderful about Star Trek is, that it's a myth. Most likely the second oldest, truly American myth we have. (Second only to Superman.) Like all myths, it is subject to change. Usually to make it more appropriate to the era it is being told in. Nature abhores a vacuum. What was right, new and popular in the beginnings of Star Trek is not even close to the times we live in now. What good is a "myth" if no one wants to hear it? Change is enivitable...so let it come.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-31-2008, 03:45 PM
Fluxchiller Fluxchiller is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 39
Default

Quote:
People on both sides of the issue kinda need to chill, IMO...
Your right, we are discussing something none of us have seen.

Its just that some people dont seem to have an open mind about it and thats one of the things Star Trek taught all of us.

And we are all forgetting that its simply a Movie 'based' on a tv show and how the design look of Star Trek has evolved is due mainly to what the budget and current design trends were at the time of each series making.
Its a Star trek for the 21st century as TOS was for the sixties and TNG was for the 80's.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-31-2008, 04:12 PM
Big D's Avatar
Big D Big D is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fluxchiller View Post
And we are all forgetting that its simply a Movie 'based' on a tv show and how the design look of Star Trek has evolved is due mainly to what the budget and current design trends were at the time of each series making.
Its a Star trek for the 21st century as TOS was for the sixties and TNG was for the 80's.
Quoted for truth You've just said in three lines something that took me half a page to articulate.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-31-2008, 04:39 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fluxchiller View Post
I think those people who feel they are being 'violated' by Abrams vision of Star Trek should 'Get A Life' as one famous person said.
Youve had your Original series, its been remastered and redone and youve got Movies from it, 10 of them, but it still lives in the shadow of Star Wars.
Obviously Paramount has decided that if its gonna do more Trek it needs to be as big as a Star Wars film and that means big budget,big design,big story.
I think from what I can gather from various interviews this Movie is for those who dont know Trek,who dont like Trek,are too young to remember Trek.
Star Trek is a BUSINESS for Paramount its called a FRANCHISE and it needs a kick up the proverbial ***.It has the potential to be the best science fiction franchise going and by just putting whats gone before on the big screen in this day and age is not gonna work.Star Trek WAS dead its was and is UNCOOL especially in this country (uk) .
The bare bones of the quoted message here is what i got warned for pointing out. I'm not going to spell it out again, but is it still impossible for you all to see where I was coming from?
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-31-2008, 04:42 PM
The Saint's Avatar
The Saint The Saint is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
I think what causes a lot of rancor among those that prefer a more classic Trek movie is all the people who keep telling them "Get over it" or "Tough, deal with it", "This ain't your Star Trek anymore," etc. That kind of talk can only make them even more resentful and defensive about the changes, I would gather.
Yes, precisely. It's like being told, "**** you." No one takes kindly to that.
__________________
"Now I did a job -- and got nothin' but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character, so let me make this abundantly clear: I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.